Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=664,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In the case of health information the quality and authenticity of the digital information have always been a matter of major concern for health and information professionals. This paper seeks to explore these concerns from the consumers' perspective. It addresses issues around the consumers' trust of health information. An online questionnaire was used to gather the data. Over a period of three weeks more than 1,300 people responded to the online questionnaire produced by The British Life and Internet Project: 81 per cent or 997 of the respondents were from the UK. A major finding was that half the respondents believed only some or even none of the health information found on the web and 45 per cent said that they had found misleading health information. This was found to be truer for respondents who surfed around. Thus respondents who used five or more sites to inform them were more likely to have found misleading information. Finally, data are presented to show that data collected from another independent study, conducted on behalf of the Department of Health, come to many of the same conclusions.

0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=2017,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.

Footnote

Vgl. auch: Rowlands, I.: Google generation: issues in information literacy. In: http://www.lucis.me.uk/retrieval%20issues.pdf.

0.0016826519 = product of:
  0.0067306077 = sum of:
    0.0067306077 = weight(_text_:information in 2040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067306077 = score(doc=2040,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 2040, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2040)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Metrics derived from user visits or sessions provide a means of evaluating Websites and an important insight into online information seeking behaviour, the most important of them being the duration of sessions and the number of pages viewed in a session, a possible busyness indicator. However, the identification of session (termed often 'sessionization') is fraught with difficulty in that there is no way of determining from a transactional log file that a user has ended their session. No one logs out. Instead a session delimiter has to be applied and this is typically done on the basis of a standard period of inactivity. To date researchers have discussed the issue of a time out delimiter in terms of a single value and if a page view time exceeds the cut-off value the session is deemed to have ended. This approach assumes that page view time is a single distribution and that the cut-off value is one point on that distribution. The authors however argue that page time distribution is composed of a number of quite separate view time distributions because of the marked differences in view times between pages (abstract, contents page, full text). This implies that a number of timeout delimiters should be applied. Employing data from a study of the OhioLINK digital journal library, the authors demonstrate how the setting of a time out delimiter impacts on the estimate of page view time and the number of estimated session. Furthermore, they also show how a number of timeout delimiters might apply and they argue that this gives a better and more robust estimate of the number of sessions, session time and page view time compared to an application of a single timeout delimiter.

Source

Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.358-372